Text Size

Jim Margolis, Obama’s media consultant, said he had planned to take a pass on the presidential race in 2008. His first candidate, former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, dropped out, and he had a rocky experience on Kerry’s 2004 campaign. But he ended up on the same plane one day with Axelrod and began to reconsider.

“You gotta come spend a little more time with Barack,” Axelrod told him.

“You know what these things are like,” Margolis said.

“There are no assholes,” Axelrod responded. “There are going to be no assholes on this campaign.”

While the Clinton campaign toggled between strategies and messages, Obama aides crafted an approach months ago that remains their guiding document to this day: run on change, win Iowa and then embark on a national campaign aimed at maximizing their delegate count.

That disciplined adherence to plan flows from Plouffe, the publicity-averse campaign manager who, with a demeanor like Obama’s, tends to avoid highs or lows. A signature trait is his ability to block out the din and the whims of the 24-hour cable news culture.

In Plouffe’s world, there should be only intentional leaks, and disputes must be dealt with in-house. Aides say that, from the beginning, the campaign declined to confirm even routine stories by Washington standards, such as personnel moves, because they wanted to release information on their terms — and have prided themselves on following the edict ever since.

Plouffe barely hid his disdain for the individual who stepped out of line when he disputed a Washington Post report last week quoting a Democratic strategist “familiar with the Obama campaign” who said “aides are likely to turn to the controversies” of the Clinton years to hasten an end to the nomination fight.

“That was, I think, an unnamed strategist claiming to have some relationship with us,” Plouffe said on a conference call with reporters. “I can assure [that] whoever was, in an act of puffery, suggesting they had some knowledge of what we're doing, is incorrect.”

Acts of “puffery” have been minimized because of one of the campaign's earliest — and in retrospect, according to aides, smartest — decisions: not to base the operation in Washington, D.C.

Obama chose Chicago largely because of family considerations, but he was well aware of the side benefits: less opportunity for distraction. Campaign aides won’t run into journalists and divulge secrets at the Washington Sports Club or Cafe Milano. And they are removed from the scorekeeping and constant second-guessing that marks Washington’s political culture.

“There isn’t a day where I don’t think I’m glad to not be doing this in an atmosphere where every 30 minutes somebody decides or a group of somebodies decide, who honestly have no basis of knowledge other than the fact that they make an appearance on cable TV, to tell you who is winning and who is losing,” Gibbs said.

Steve Elmendorf, deputy campaign manager for Kerry in 2004 and a Clinton supporter, said the role of geography should not be underestimated.

“If you look at the history of successful presidential campaigns, the ones that have done the best are not in Washington,” he said. “By headquartering your campaign in a place that makes it harder for people to sort of casually get involved, you get a tighter, more disciplined team. I know there are people who have indicated [that Clinton] should have been in Westchester or up somewhere in New York.”

Less than 24 hours after Pennsylvania voters dealt Obama a sound defeat, Gibbs dismissed any suggestion that a fresh wave of critical analysis would take a toll on the campaign.

“I don’t think so,” Gibbs said, eating mashed potatoes in the lobby of an Indiana University Southeast building, where his candidate just held an event. “I’m sure it is easier to sit elsewhere and say ‘I would do this differently.’ But we feel confident in the plan and we are still ahead, so it is hard to quibble.”

I admire that the Obama campaign doesn't get caught up in all the media hype - a large portion of it fed by the Clinton campaign, or what's left of it -- it shows he and his people can handle the faux heat. The Clintons have had nothing but turmoil since Mrs Inevitable landed in THIRD PLACE in Iowa. Her co-called "comeback" in New Hampshire was entirely driven by media expectations/polls and nothing else, and even - tears and all - then she only managed a 2.6% squeeker. The one thing I admire about Bush is he never got caught up in the media frenzy, his campaign took major hits and he stayed with his team - like Obama has done. The Dem nomination is OVER, somebody in that party needs to find some steel and inform Mr and Mrs Inevitable they got beat by a rookie politician.

For the umpteenth time: This is a race for delegates. Obama won more delegates in Texas than Clinton. Therefore, Obama won Texas. Ohio and Pennsylvania are two losses. Two losses is not a "string of losses". Lose your ridiculous bias or lose this reader!

I'm not sure what kind of Democratic party building Mrs. Clinton and HER team have done, but I'd venture a guess that it is NONE, or we'd have heard about it. It's no surprise to me that Mrs. Clinton has placed her own personal interests ahead of the Democratic party, as we all know that the Clintons have a long history of doing just that. The shocking thing to me is that she has this idiotic "base" that ignores the facts.

You forgot to mention that Obama had a blowout victory in Mississippi last month. Or does that not count, because Clinton didn't win it ? I wonder why we haven't heard a single statement from Hillary Clinton about the controversial Sean Bell case in New York. This is a potential powder keg and Al Sharpton is threatening recrimations in the city. Why haven't we heard anything from her on this ? Instead of her silly gimmicks that involve brandishing baseball bats, Mrs. Clinton should be addressing this serious issue. Maybe she could bring along her baseball bat if and when she ever gets around to addressing it.

Hillary Clinton did not have an decisive win in Pennsylvania nor does she have the delegate numbers behind her, nor the popular election numbers. The MSM's negative judgment of Senator Obama is hare brain and out of touch with the early bench mark set for Hillary that she would win big in Pennsylvania. But her numbers were not as expected. Hillary came up short of a double digit win (it was 9.40%) even though she had the "brand" whereas Senator Obama had an uphill battle to sell his "brand". The MSM's spin of this is a complete farrago and nothing less.

Essedarius Maiestas: Are you a pro-Israel Zionist? If you are, you must not have read the history of Zionism which is dedicated to ethnic cleansing and apartheid. These are the facts if one has taken the time to sample some of the more hate filled works of Jabotinsky the "Wolf".

He will win the nomination but not the election because his appeal is only to the "true believers." The blacks who will vote for him because he bis black and the far left who will vote for him because he is far left. The white guilt left will vote for him to feel good about themselves, not because they think that he would be a good president.

He doesn't appeal to the center where the rest of the US resides. Why should his true believers ever cause a problem within his organization? True believers never find fault with their leader. Whatever he says or does is justified by his person. When he loses in the fall, even if he loses 48-2 in the states, this true believers will blame racism and other factors rather than the inexperience, or far left position of their candidate.

If you read the comments of his true believers, they is not rational, bumper sticker chanting and in some cases sophomoric. This is not going to appeal to the people that he needs to appeal to. He is far left and the country is not far left. He can't move to the middle now because he has already shown the country that he is far left and only the far left will vote for him.

I think Sen. Obama needs to take the high road and proceed to run against John McCain. McCain's latest remarks about how he would have reacted differently during Katrina was the last straw for me. Clinton continues to demand debates, stomping her feet and throwing her fits, Obama fights to keep the focus on the issues. Below is something that is floating around in certain circles but in my opinion rings true with the latest defection of a major fundraiser. Clinton is so desparate she is willing to let the party burn. More than likely Mr. Guerra Mondragon defected after he heard that Clinton's plan is to bloody up Obama as much as she can so she can play the I told you so....card when November rolls around. Insiders in her campaign say that is her plan, then she will run in 2012 and she thinks she will win. If this is the tone of the campaign then there is no surprise that people are leaving. It proves that Clinton only cares about winning if she is willing to attempt to hand the race over to the GOP so she can lament that she could have won. Yeah, she really cares about all Americans.....she is willing to leave this country in peril for another four years if she can hurt Obama enough, refuses to unite the party for a victory.....it is said that she is in fact telling people if she cannot get the nomination to say they will vote for McCain. WAKE UP AMERICA!!! This is what Hill Clinton is all about, if she can't win she doesn't care about our lives and what will happen in the next four years if we have McCain. We cannot take another 4 years of a Bush administration. I have supported Obama from the beginning. He is the best choice, but the Clinton's will do anything to prove their delusional point. Bill Clinton touted he was the first black president.......Hillary thinks she is ahead in the popular vote.....and they have insiders defecting because of the latest plan to attack Obama resulting in the demise of the Democratic Party. The Superdelegates need to endorse now and get her out of this race....she will continue to run past the inauguration if we let her. If she carries out her latest plan, she does not deserve to be senator. GET OUT HILLARY

Obama's campaign has been very well run, only problem is he can't shake the harpie

He can't shake her because he can't appeal to the middle. He followers scare epole with their chants and cpmments on this site and others. They threaten and yell (All caps!), make crazy comments about white people and generally drive even the people who might think of giving him a look away. The only people they appeal to are the Huffinigton/KOS/ move on people who are the far left fringe of this country.

His followers will sink his campaign with their comments. No one wants to be called names, nor do they want to read the nonsense that some have written on this site and others. That will NEVER get your guy the votes.

Mamie: By all econometric standards and studies, the U.S. economy is headed for the brink. This will play to the advantage of Senator Obama and even Hillary because the majority of voters and frightened and angry at the prospects of losing good paying jobs having to take low paying service jobs at Mao-Mart.

For the average American who can still remember the days of the 20 dollar an hour job--America is a country that is being bled to death by free trade which only benefits those with abundant capital but punishes workers. When the price of oil hovers around 200 dollars a barrel--and it will--voters will be glad to vote for Senator Obama. Those who don't will be the truck nutz Republicans who are suicidal.

Silly mamie. My husband is a recovering Republican who voted TWICE for Bush, I am a lifelong Democrat who has never voted Republican.

He made one large contribution to Senator Obama's campaign in December, and I have made several donations over the span of the last 8 months or so.

Hi Loretta,

If I didn't know you to be an OK person, I would take offense to the recovering... This is the kind of talk that turns people off.

Your candidate needs to appeal to the middle and this kind of approach will not win one other vote. Your hubby may have changed his vote for reasons other than Obama as a person. If he wants to send money to Obama, fine with me. That is irrelevant.